The importance of technical discoveries (mid-eighteenth century., England):
process of replacing manual labor with machines, then the first in the cotton industry in the wool. In fact, through the invention of the spacecraft flying by Kay, a weaver, had doubled the amount of daily work (see page book. 243 to 244).
Revolution or evolution?
might seem, then, that these inventions of new machines had given rise to the industrial revolution, and this opinion was Karl Marx, who dedicated the fifteenth chapter of "Capital" the machines and large-scale industry " . He identifies also in the manufacturing base of modern industry, as the great inventions of Watt Ankwright and could not have applied if the period of manufacturing had not produced "a large number of skilled workers mechanics."
The term "industrial revolution" that uses Marx had already been used by John Stuart Mill in 1848 and 1844 by F. Engels in "The conditions of the working class in England" , and was then ushered into common use by Toynbee, who in 1884 published his "Lectures on the Industrial Revolution in England". Even for Toynbee the origins of the industrial revolution and the replacement of the factory system to the domestic system, were sought largely in the mechanical inventions of the second half of the 700, but he also emphasizes other factors, the significant increase of the population, or processing, through the process of enclosures (enclosures), the medieval open fields in modern and large farms.
These aspects turned his attention to the Mantoux, but with a tendency to reappraise the importance of the machine because, in his view, the invention of the machine was not done at once and since sixteenth century machines were used very ingenious and sometimes very powerful, on the other hand, from manufacturing to large-scale industry is passed through almost imperceptible changes, so you should replace the word machine with a more wide, which should indicate the technical development in all its forms. Also for the
Sombart in transition from home to the previous industry succesivi capitalist industry that there would be no gap when it is assumed that uses the word revolution. That if ever there was the late Middle Ages, after the fifteenth century, when they made significant progress in the technique of mining and metallurgy, when the rapid increase in demand imposed the manufacture of new products and therefore the introduction of new tools work, as in the textile industry, and when, finally, the great changes in market conditions began to artisan prevent the direct purchase of raw materials and put him in the employ of the wholesale merchant.
The take-off or off
An essential feature of these interpretations that insist more on the evolution of revolution is that they tend to overshadow the suffering and hardships that the transition from the old system of production to the next generated classes workers. Just read "The Industrial Revolution" dell'Ashton to see how long the whole process would take place without conflict with the peaceful agreement between the various social classes (sic).
The fact is that these really historical evolution could not understand all the pain that the sum of the industrial revolution had brought with him, and the first thing to do to regain a deep sense of drama was quaella to reaffirm the importance of the fracture made by the industrial revolution in the course of economic development between 700 and 800. This was done by
Rostow, who spoke of "take-off in the direction of a development that is obtained from self" (take-off into self-sustained growth): the takeoff is defined as the time when "in a decade or two, is the fundamental structure of the economy, both the social and political structure of society are transformed in such a way that can be fed regularly after a continuous pace of development "; or the take-off can be defined in two ways: the first covers the period in the life of an economy in which, at the same time, one or more modern industries beginning to determine not only productive but also new features that effects spread on a large scale, the second argues that, because you can have the take-off, an economy must demonstrate the ability to exploit the developments after so well by the emergence of new industries-driving. And 'this demonstration of the ability to move a group of sectors-rail to another, which distinguishes the non-industrial wave of transition from the real take-off.
This functional requirement has been established that the take-off comprises an area of \u200b\u200babout 20 years; such a period is needed to reveal whether a company is able to overcome the structural crisis that the initial gap of development usually brings with it, and that is also able to assimilate that changing technological flow from which sustained development depends. After these statements of the Rostow
supporters of the piecemeal development are now silent. However, Rostow himself was perhaps far from denying a piecemeal development of the economy, though in his book "The porcess of economic growth" (Oxford, 1953) states that in any process of industrialization, we can distinguish several stages: a first pre-industrial revolution characterized by commercial capitalism, of a second off-tak, a third of sustained development, and finally, a fourth of maturity. In fact, Rostow, also starting from the most recent experience of paesei underdeveloped in which it is felt deeply the need for rapid changes in the structure of agriculture and basic primitive, has taken the concept of revolution. This reassessment of the concept of revolution has again led scholars to search for reasons why they were at the base. So, here is list the various factors that Rostow, usually, can contribute to a period of "off": population, agriculture, technology, capital formation and foreign trade. Usually, we said, because what he says is largely the Rostow steeped in sociology, as he tends to apply the same to all guidizio crieteri of similar phenomena that occurred from 700 to present (at the expense of specificity of the different situations).
"Prometheus Unbound" Landes
According to ancient myth, Prometheus was the Titan who stole fire from the gods as a gift to the arts to people with carriers of civilization. The gesture of defiance cost him his divine punishment: chained to a cliff, would a vulture ate his liver for eternity. As the titanic undertaking of Prometheus was alluding to a decisive event in human history, in the same world Landes rivluzione Industrail attaches to the value of a fracture essential, after which nothing will be as before. Prometheus was freed, in other words, the enormous power inherent in capiacità man to manipulate nature has finally full deployment. Landes is committed to a complete reconstruction of the development that Europe saw the phasing out the agricultural economy and small-scale in favor of the indsutriale. The English industrial revolution is the beginning of an era of continuous and rapid transformation that changes and sometimes reverses the values \u200b\u200band the conduct of men in all aspects, economic, social, political, cultural and ideological. The world will never be the same: the states will soon be separated by a gulf in terms of power and welfare, including the developed ones and those who remain tied to an agricultural economy, the traditional social and political relations will be unstoppable shocked by the rise of the bourgeois class. Landes, in short, is among those who interpret the crucial years in between 700 and 800 as a period of radical discontinuity with the past.
names in another color, for those who have not understood, contain links to the best wikipedia, for whom curiosity had any other business.
0 comments:
Post a Comment